automatically saved by birth

[turnorburn]

Mate, I have a PhD in NT (dissertation only in the British system) so I've HAD to be an independent researcher with peers who scrupulously examined what I wrote. Of course I've examined Ps 51:5 from your perspective. No scholar worth his salt would refuse to do so.

The problem in your discussion with me is that you do not interact with the content of what I write. It's as though I've wasted my time presenting the evidence and you are silent with regard to the content. That's called a red herring fallacy.

Bye,
Oz

If you have a PhD why do you use a corrupted version of Gods word (ESV)?

http://www.scionofzion.com/esv_exposed.htm

 

[OzSpen]

If you have a PhD why do you use a corrupted version of Gods word (ESV)?

http://www.scionofzion.com/esv_exposed.htm

Because I have enough nous to know how to assess Bible versions and discern the integrity or otherwise of the texts from which they come.

I have knowledge to know that the link you gave presents a genetic logical fallacy. The content in that link engages in erroneous/fallacious reasoning. I suggest that you become conversant with how Christian preachers and writers can use fallacies to try to convince you that the ESV is corrupted because it is based on the RSV.

Do you want to know something? Most of the modern versions are based on the same Hebrew-Aramaic (for OT) and Greek (NT) texts. You are barking up the wrong tree if you want to convince me that the ESV is a corrupted version. Is the KJV, based on the Textus Receptus NT, not a corrupted version with many Greek variants? Is the Textus Receptus pure when compared with the original MSS?

Oz

 

[Jethro Bodine]

You claim you don't have to be born again to want to please God and live for him. Frankly, that's untrue. The fact is: 'No one understands; no one seeks for God' (Rom 3:11 ESV). NO unbeliever wants to please God and live for Him. They do not seek God. How can they when they are rebels against God? Rom 3:18 (ESV) confirms, 'There is no fear of God before their eyes'.

For you to conclude that someone who is not born again can want to please God and live for him, you are reading a different Bible to the one I read.

Let's try it again:
2For I testify about them (the Israelites) that they have a zeal for God, but not in accordance with knowledge. 3For not knowing about God’s righteousness and seeking to establish their own" (Romans 9:2-3 NASB bold mine)

I myself had a longing and zeal for God before I was saved. That's why I got saved. I found out my best efforts at living for and pleasing God just wasn't going to cut it. I realized that I could not get from here to there. That's what dying through the law is all about. You have to realize your best efforts at righteousness aren't good enough. It is in that way that the law leads a person trying to approach God and live for him to the only way to live for and please him--faith in Jesus Christ.

 

[turnorburn]

Because I have enough nous to know how to assess Bible versions and discern the integrity or otherwise of the texts from which they come.

I have knowledge to know that the link you gave presents a genetic logical fallacy. The content in that link engages in erroneous/fallacious reasoning. I suggest that you become conversant with how Christian preachers and writers can use fallacies to try to convince you that the ESV is corrupted because it is based on the RSV.

Do you want to know something? Most of the modern versions are based on the same Hebrew-Aramaic (for OT) and Greek (NT) texts. You are barking up the wrong tree if you want to convince me that the ESV is a corrupted version. Is the KJV, based on the Textus Receptus NT, not a corrupted version with many Greek variants? Is the Textus Receptus pure when compared with the original MSS?

Oz

i can see I'm barking up the wrong tree trying to convince you of anything..

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Jethro,

That's not what Romans 7 (ESV) teaches us, where Paul demonstrates the internal battle that even mature Christians endure. Why does Paul do what he doesn't want to do? He states that it is because of 'sin that dwells within me' (Rom 7:20 ESV).

Yes, he has God's law in his 'inner being' (Rom 7:22 ESV) but what about 'another law waging war against the law of my mind and making me captive to the law of sin that dwells in my members' (Rom 7:23 ESV)?

The Christian will never be able to get away from the two laws at work within him/her. We nave the new nature but the old nature/law is still within us and Paul knew this battle. So do I.

Oz

You can't be joined to new husband Christ until old husband 'sin nature' dies. But so many Christians think they are married to both at the same time. Not true according to Romans 7:1-6.

"1Do you not know, brothers and sisters—for I am speaking to those who know the law—that the law has authority over someone only as long as that person lives? 2For example, by law a married woman is bound to her husband as long as he is alive, but if her husband dies, she is released from the law that binds her to him. 3So then, if she has sexual relations with another man while her husband is still alive, she is called an adulteress. But if her husband dies, she is released from that law and is not an adulteress if she marries another man.

4So, my brothers and sisters, you also died to the law through the body of Christ, that you might belong to another, to him who was raised from the dead, in order that we might bear fruit for God. 5For when we were in the realm of the flesh,a the sinful passions aroused by the law were at work in us, so that we bore fruit for death. 6But now, by dying to what once bound us, we have been released from the law so that we serve in the new way of the Spirit, and not in the old way of the written code." (Romans 7:1-6 NIV)

 

[OzSpen]

Let's try it again:
2For I testify about them (the Israelites) that they have a zeal for God, but not in accordance with knowledge. 3For not knowing about God’s righteousness and seeking to establish their own" (Romans 9:2-3 NASB bold mine)

I myself had a longing and zeal for God before I was saved. That's why I got saved. I found out my best efforts at living for and pleasing God just wasn't going to cut it. I realized that I could not get from here to there. That's what dying through the law is all about. You have to realize your best efforts at righteousness aren't good enough. It is in that way that the law leads a person trying to approach God and live for him to the only way to live for and please him--faith in Jesus Christ.

You did not respond to the verses I wrote about. We cannot have a reasonable conversation when you do this.

 

[OzSpen]

i can see I'm barking up the wrong tree trying to convince you of anything..

You will not convince me when you provide false information/evidence.

 

[OzSpen]

You can't be joined to new husband Christ until old husband 'sin nature' dies. But so many Christians think they are married to both at the same time. Not true according to Romans 7:1-6.

"1Do you not know, brothers and sisters—for I am speaking to those who know the law—that the law has authority over someone only as long as that person lives? 2For example, by law a married woman is bound to her husband as long as he is alive, but if her husband dies, she is released from the law that binds her to him. 3So then, if she has sexual relations with another man while her husband is still alive, she is called an adulteress. But if her husband dies, she is released from that law and is not an adulteress if she marries another man.

4So, my brothers and sisters, you also died to the law through the body of Christ, that you might belong to another, to him who was raised from the dead, in order that we might bear fruit for God. 5For when we were in the realm of the flesh,a the sinful passions aroused by the law were at work in us, so that we bore fruit for death. 6But now, by dying to what once bound us, we have been released from the law so that we serve in the new way of the Spirit, and not in the old way of the written code." (Romans 7:1-6 NIV)

You are still not answering the verses I wrote about. Seems as though I'm wasting my time when you refuse to deal with the evidence I supply.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

You did not respond to the verses I wrote about. We cannot have a reasonable conversation when you do this.

I did respond:

2For I testify about them (the Israelites) that they have a zeal for God, but not in accordance with knowledge. 3For not knowing about God’s righteousness and seeking to establish their own" (Romans 9:2-3 NASB bold mine)

Your problem is you are not including the whole counsel of the scriptures when you decide that Romans 3:11 and Romans 3:18 mean you have to be a believer to want to seek God. Israel itself is proof that it's possible to want God and be zealous for Him without being born again (reference above). And I explained how it is that very effort of approaching God through your own effort at fulfilling God's righteous requirements is a valuable stepping stone to faith.

I think it obvious that what Paul was referring to about no one seeking God is they will not do that on their own, not that they will never ever do that. We know that because the Bible itself speaks of the multitudes of people who seek to live for God but who do not come to the way of faith to do that, but rather, answer the call to holiness by basking in the glory of their own effort to do that (like Paul). Many are called and attempt to live for God, but few are chosen by virtue of having faith in Christ.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

You are still not answering the verses I wrote about. Seems as though I'm wasting my time when you refuse to deal with the evidence I supply.

What is it about Romans 7:1-6 that I posted do you not grasp? It explains the required death of old husband sin nature before you can be joined to new husband Christ, and how it shows that Paul is still in bondage to that nature in Romans 7. It isn't until he gets to Christ in Romans 8 that he is free from the bondage of the Adamic nature.

 

[OzSpen]

I did respond:
Your problem is you are not including the whole counsel of the scriptures when you decide that Romans 3:11 and Romans 3:18 mean you have to be a believer to want to seek God.

At no point have I stated that. It's a straw man argument.

 

[OzSpen]

What is it about Romans 7:1-6 that I posted do you not grasp? It explains the required death of old husband sin nature before you can be joined to new husband Christ, and how it shows that Paul is still in bondage to that nature in Romans 7. It isn't until he gets to Christ in Romans 8 that he is free from the bondage of the Adamic nature.

No Christian is ever free from the old nature. We have it until our dying day, as Romans 7 demonstrates.

 

[stovebolts]

Mate, I have a PhD in NT (dissertation only in the British system) so I've HAD to be an independent researcher with peers who scrupulously examined what I wrote. Of course I've examined Ps 51:5 from your perspective. No scholar worth his salt would refuse to do so.

The problem in your discussion with me is that you do not interact with the content of what I write. It's as though I've wasted my time presenting the evidence and you are silent with regard to the content. That's called a red herring fallacy.

Bye,
Oz

I'm glad for your accomplishments. You should be proud as well.

Just so you know, it would be foolish for me to engage with the context of your argument on many fronts.
First, it would only serve to divide us when we both share in the glory of our Lord.
Second, I have no inner need to be right.
Third. To prove that one is right means that the other is wrong.
Fourth. When one takes the position of being right, their goal is to prove the other wrong.

I have no desire to engage in that type of foolishness. For me, it is easier for me to accept that you believe what you believe and I don't have to change that. After all, it is simply a belief and it's not like believing in original sin is going to cause you to either gain or loose your salvation and it certainly shouldn't give you an excuse to treat others poorly.

In short, the purpose of me posting wasn't to prove you wrong. It was simply to say that there are other viable views.

Enjoy your weekend.

 

[turnorburn]

You will not convince me when you provide false information/evidence.

Put side by side a child can see the corruption..

 

[Jethro Bodine]

No Christian is ever free from the old nature. We have it until our dying day, as Romans 7 demonstrates.

I showed you from Romans 7 that you can not still be married to your old 'husband' and be free to marry new husband Christ. The bond between old husband and master 'sin nature' MUST first be ended before we are free to be bound to new husband and Master Christ/righteousness. Paul uses what we earthlings know and understand about the legalities of marriage and laws governing marriage to illustrate this truth. Do you disagree? Do you say we can still be in marital commitment and bond to our sin nature (and as a result, still under the law) and be married to Christ at the same time? Is that what you are saying?

 

[Jethro Bodine]

The Biblical answer to the problem of the flesh, for Christians, seems to be to remember that you are no longer a sinner by nature. By faith we understand that the old propensity toward sin, and it's power over us, has ended, like when a husband dies and the wife is no longer legally bound to have to obey him. The problem is, even when abusive ex-husbands die they still haunt the poor wife who had to legally endure his abuse. So it is with sin and the law. The power of the law enforced our relationship and bond with former husband 'sin', like a marriage license enforces an earthly marriage. It isn't until the cad dies that we are no longer bound by the power of the law to serve that miserable old husband. When he died, the law governing our bond to husband 'sin' could no longer enforce that relationship (1 Corinthians 15:56 NASB). We became free to marry another--Jesus Christ. And now we bear the fruit of our submission to Him, in his likeness, just as we did that to our old husband 'sin' and produced fruit in his likeness.

In Christ, the old bond to sin is ended. What we struggle with are old memories and habits of our former required service to now deceased husband 'sin nature'. Through knowledge we become aware of the reality of how that relationship is truly over and we move ahead in faith with our new husband Jesus.

I share this, not to be right. But to build the kingdom of God and reap the reward for doing so, being found faithful to whatever way it is that God has gifted and enabled me to build his temple. I know no greater joy and reward than seeing the spiritual light bulb light up in the person who sees God's truths. I mean that. And the reward of seeing that person on the other side is going to be all the more glorious.

 

[dianegcook]

Why are we not automatically saved by birth, when or if our parents are true Christians and have done the family/land deliverance thing? Doesn't this make sense? Or is the sin nature retained in man even after being saved?

Good question
Yahshua was born "in the flesh", yet He was without sin..
In Jer.31:29,30
But every one shall die for his own iniquity, every man that eateth the sour grape, his teeth shall be set on edge.

Yahshua was tempted as we are tempted. Yet without sin..

As the Lord's Prayer,
Forgive our trespasses, as we forgive those that trespass against us.
And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil...

My

 

[Rollo Tamasi]

No born again person has the old sin nature.
What they have is the old body of flesh that used to be in bondage to the sin nature; a freedom from bondage which we are realizing more and more, through knowledge, as we grow up into the full stature of Christ.

How can this be true?
We must have the old sin nature if we are able to fall back into it and lose our salvation.

 

[Rollo Tamasi]

Because in Romans 7 he is still the legalistic Pharisee seeking to please God that he was before he was born again. Just because he wanted to please God in chapter 7 doesn't mean he had to be a born again Christian. Many Jews were zealous for God prior to the gospel revelation of Jesus Christ:

"31but Israel, pursuing a law of righteousness, did not arrive at that law (of faith--see context). 32Why? Because they did not pursue it by faith, but as though it were by works.
2For I testify about them that they have a zeal for God, but not in accordance with knowledge. 3For not knowing about God’s righteousness and seeking to establish their own" (Romans 8:31-32 NASB, Romans 9:2-3 NASB italics in original, parenthesis mine)

You don't have to be born again to want to please God and live for him. But a lack of knowledge about the righteousness that comes by faith will keep you in the deceitful bondage of fallen flesh. If you're born again, it's your flesh talking. If you're not born again, you still have the Adamic programming at work in you keeping you in bondage to fallen flesh--like how a husband rules over his wife through the power of a marriage license, whether the wife likes it or not (Romans 7:1-6 NASB).

You are making things far too complicated.
Salvation is not this complicated.

 

[OzSpen]

I showed you from Romans 7 that you can not still be married to your old 'husband' and be free to marry new husband Christ. The bond between old husband and master 'sin nature' MUST first be ended before we are free to be bound to new husband and Master Christ/righteousness. Paul uses what we earthlings know and understand about the legalities of marriage and laws governing marriage to illustrate this truth. Do you disagree? Do you say we can still be in marital commitment and bond to our sin nature (and as a result, still under the law) and be married to Christ at the same time? Is that what you are saying?

And I've showed you from other passages in Romans 7 that the Christian still has the old nature. 'Now if I do what I do not want, it is no longer I who do it, but sin that dwells within me' (Rom 7:20 ESV).

We are talking past each other and you don't seem to want to see that for the believer, sin continues to dwell in you and me.

lOz